684A.85/4–954: Telegram
No. 786
The Ambassador in Iraq (Berry) to the Department of State1
605. Prime Minister Jamali, when I called on him today at his request, said he wished to voice his serious concern over developments regarding Palestine. Recent attacks by Israel on Jordan, the latest of which had been the April 6 attack on the Jordan border, had convinced the Arab states that Israel was determined to provoke trouble. Lebanon, on behalf of Jordan, had, therefore, placed the April 6 attack before the SC. He had heard that Israel had also taken the bus attack to SC. He had a report from Iraq Embassy Washington that it was the intention of the Western powers to deal with the whole Palestine situation as one package, but he wished to tell me it could not be dealt with in this manner. Each incident had to be dealt with on its own merits—Qibya, the bus attack, Nahhalin, and now the recent border attacks. He wanted me to know that should the Western powers attempt to deal at UN with the present situation as a package the Arab states were determined to walk out. This action had been approved at Cairo AL meeting by the Arab states, which had also agreed to urge US, in light of recent events, to withhold aid from Israel (Embtel 581 [586], April 2);2 had reviewed their arms potential in view of possible arms embargo; and had voiced, at Egyptian instigation, opposition to any Arab state unilaterally joining Turkish-Pakistan pact.
Prime Minister said he also wanted me to know that Jordan had asked for military assistance. He thought, however, that Brigadier [Page 1506] Daghistani, who had been sent to Amman with a small staff, had convinced Jordan that this was undesirable at this time. Tension remained high, nevertheless, along all of the Israeli-Jordan border.
Prime Minister then said that, in the circumstances, he requested me to urge the US Government:
- (1)
- Not to take steps which would further separate US and Arab states. Pressure on the Arabs again to make peace at this moment would most certainly alienate the Arabs;
- (2)
Not to condone Israeli aggression. Cutting off financial aid to Israel whose strength and ability to attack the Arabs was derived from American aid, would certainly be an effective means of showing US displeasure.
Israel, he said, should remain calm and contain themselves. He could assure me that no Arab state would touch Israel unless it continued its aggression. He realized that Israel was trying to provoke the Arab states. There was a limit, however, to which the Arab governments could resist popular pressure. Iraq itself had no interest in a fight with Israel. Iraq wanted to repair the damage of the flood and to get on with its own development.
I replied that I understood his concern and that I would convey it and his requests to the Department. I thought, however, that the proposed action of Arab states regarding UN was not in their best interests. It would most certainly alienate public opinion in the US. USSR had walked out of SC and Israel out of MAC and had achieved nothing. He said that if the Arabs walked out it would be a public manifestation of their conviction that justice could not be found at UN and from Western powers. He also wanted me to understand that if the other Arab states walked out Iraq would be obliged to act with them.
Doctor Jamali, although obviously concerned, was calm and moderate throughout our conversation. I believe he is convinced that Israel is spoiling for a fight and that it is trying to provoke the Arabs to retaliation. He is seeking to restrain the Arab states in their own best interest. He believes the problem is greater than can be encompassed within the restricted horizons of the Middle East; therefore, in the interest of peace and stability, he is endeavoring to obtain a fair hearing from UN and the Western powers.